Watching this Netflix weekly movie, I breathed a great sigh of relief. Why? Because I was beginning to think that I couldn't watch an Aronofsky film and actually enjoy it, and I definitely enjoyed The Fountain quite a bit. In some ways, it's more abstract than Pi or Requiem for a Dream, but in other ways, it makes more logical sense than both of those movies put together. Also, Aronofsky is clearly a very visual director, and with a bigger budget and a more epic story to tell, that penchant for painting visual portraits of emotion and theme served the story of the Fountain well. To say this movie was my favorite by Aronofsky is an understatement. Maybe it was the subject matter - I mean, I gladly accept and have interest in a timeless romance over a numerical thriller or an avant garde drug movie any day. Really, though, I think I liked this film more because Aronofsky also improved upon his skill and his sensibility, making The Fountain his most mature work to date.
The story follows, ultimately, the love of two souls (Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz) in three different allegorical settings. In one setting, Jackman is a Spanish conquistador searching for the fabled Tree of Life in a Mayan temple on behalf of his beautiful queen in the hopes of claiming its youth and immortality-imbuing sap as treasure for Spain. This setting seems to be a story written by Izzi (Weisz), a woman and writer in something like a present-day situation who is dying of cancer. Her husband, Tommy (Jackman), is a scientist in a race to search for Izzi's cure, and samples of a curious Central American tree lead to an amazing reversal of sickness and age in their test animals, all while Izzi's condition worsens at a pace beyond Tommy's ability to stop. In the future, Jackman becomes a sort of cosmonaut, transporting himself and the aging Tree of Life, which may possibly contain Izzi's spirit, through the universe toward a dying star in a nebula of some significance, though he flashes back to Tommy and the conquistador's life as if they were his own (and they might be). Love in life is the theme that unites, and the film is decorated with beautiful visual imagery to round out the epic tale.
This movie worked for me because, even though the plot did not follow a logical, progressive narrative with a clear start and finish, I still felt as if the entire story were told in a satisfying way that left enough open to guess at and think about and haunt the viewer while certainly bringing the movie to a reasonable conclusion. The visual effects in this film were stunning and tastefully done, with images that seemed to transcend story and become the story all to themselves. The use of color themes in cinematography and costume and art direction to demarcate time period was very effective and gorgeous. The score by Clint Mansell (the same guy who did Pi at least) was haunting and beautiful, illustrating in sound that timeless quality that becomes an underlying theme for the movie.
Hugh Jackman was particularly impressive this time around. As actors go, I would never have chalked him up automatically to one of the greats. I mean, he was a good choice to play Wolverine, but most of his films, characters, and performances have been underwhelming as a rule, even if he is a handsome handsome man. Not so this time. Without his fine, emotionally profound work in this film, the visual and audio components wouldn't have seemed quite so rich or fulfilling. Rachel Weisz was good too, but I was particularly impressed by Jackman, who played three different people with the same soul's purpose with heart-wrenching passion and sadness.
What I also like about this movie is that it has the effect of getting under your skin in a slow but definite way. I think Aronofsky shoots for that effect in all of his films, but this one worked that mojo on me a little bit more potently than the previous two films. I was prepared not to like this film, but now I think I love it, as sad and abstract as it was.
My only complaint with this film was the hurry-up-and-go pacing of the end. There were some deliberately unanswered questions, but they came at a decidedly frenetic pace after a plot that unfolded so carefully and deliberately (and, yes, even a little slowly) prior to the end sequence. In the end, I noticed that Aronofsky employs this technique in all of his movies, but here, it felt out of place and a little like a movie trailer for the unknown to come. The flashing images, as opposed to the smooth and flowing transitions used previously, reminded me of one of those brainwashing videos seen on the TV show Lost, used by the Others for reasons as yet unknown. I just felt a little...rushed I guess after everything else was so carefully and slowly laid before me.
That's a very minor flaw, but it does temper my rating for this film, which I think is an 8.5 (between very good and perfectly entertaining). Does this film pass the test of future purchase? I don't know about that. Maybe. I liked it a lot, but I'm not sure it's one that I would want to watch repeatedly. Maybe some day, if it sticks with me as much as it is sitting on my heart and mind right now. In any case, the Fountain is a true work of art - and probably a love-it-or-hate-it piece - but my favorite of Aronofsky's so far.